Under 21 allowed in bar?

[LovesCruising]

While I understand their policy I think it's ridiculous that they would be so strict when parents say it's ok. It's ironic that the rules are more restrictive at sea and while docked in foreign ports than they are in most US states. It must be a liability thing.

 

Cruise line is not US owned - they can make their own rules and definitely feel its a liability issue. Can't understand why its so important to buy your underage child a drink?

[joekatie]

Liability issue yet they will over serve anyone willing to buy drinks? Why not buy your child drinks if they are almost of age? The majority of kids that have issues drinking in college are the ones who never had a drop prior.

 

Sent from my XT897 using Forums mobile app

[cage keeper]

Liability issue yet they will over serve anyone willing to buy drinks? Why not buy your child drinks if they are almost of age? The majority of kids that have issues drinking in college are the ones who never had a drop prior.

 

Sent from my XT897 using Forums mobile app

 

I so agree with you. When we were teens, early 70's, parents said "don't go out and drink and get caught, I will not bail you out. There is a full bar in the basement, drink at home". We did it one or two times, no fun and until I was well into my 40's only had one or two drinks a year.

[DrD]

Cruise line is not US owned - they can make their own rules and definitely feel its a liability issue. Can't understand why its so important to buy your underage child a drink?

 

that's my point, glad you agree. my kids are too young but if I did want to buy them a drink in a few years I would not like to told I can't especially when its legal in most of the US. As for understanding it's cultural. my heritage is French and in our culture kids usually start drinking watered-down wine by age 12 or 13. we believe that early exposure in the presence of parents is important in order to teach responsible drinking and to "de mystify" the whole experience. furthermore there are significant health benefits, although it's not clear that starting earlier helps.

 

I hope this helps you understand. after all the ship is not called "the Restrictions of the Seas."

Edited March 6, 2014 by DrD

[OCruisers]

They are allowed in ALL bars unless it clearly states: 21 minimum age.

No alcohol ... but they can go in.

LuLu

~~~~

[dadroy]

While I understand their policy I think it's ridiculous that they would be so strict when parents say it's ok. It's ironic that the rules are more restrictive at sea and while docked in foreign ports than they are in most US states. It must be a liability thing.

 

I agree, when I took my 8 year old on the cruise they refused to let her have a margarita, even though I told them it was ok.:rolleyes:

[Aquahound]

Liability issue yet they will over serve anyone willing to buy drinks? Why not buy your child drinks if they are almost of age? The majority of kids that have issues drinking in college are the ones who never had a drop prior.

 

While what you say might make sense, you can thank the litigious American society for policies like this, especially when going after companies with deep pockets like RCI. Should anything happen, the venue for a case against the cruise line is Miami and while drinking on the high seas while under 21 is not illegal, hearing the case in a venue where businesses are fined heavily for serving to minors will not go well for the cruise line.

[LovesCruising]

that's my point, glad you agree. my kids are too young but if I did want to buy them a drink in a few years I would not like to told I can't especially when its legal in most of the US. As for understanding it's cultural. my heritage is French and in our culture kids usually start drinking watered-down wine by age 12 or 13. we believe that early exposure in the presence of parents is important in order to teach responsible drinking and to "de mystify" the whole experience. furthermore there are significant health benefits, although it's not clear that starting earlier helps.

 

I hope this helps you understand. after all the ship is not called "the Restrictions of the Seas."

 

Completely understand. My father was of the same mindset - early exposure, drink at home and you won't be so curious on the outside or as you say "de mystify" We were also allowed at home. All I can say is it didn't go so well for some in the family and continues to this day. Clearly it depends on the child. Fortunately there are restrictions in life.

[Big_G]

that's my point, glad you agree. my kids are too young but if I did want to buy them a drink in a few years I would not like to told I can't especially when its legal in most of the US. As for understanding it's cultural. my heritage is French and in our culture kids usually start drinking watered-down wine by age 12 or 13. we believe that early exposure in the presence of parents is important in order to teach responsible drinking and to "de mystify" the whole experience. furthermore there are significant health benefits, although it's not clear that starting earlier helps.

 

I hope this helps you understand. after all the ship is not called "the Restrictions of the Seas."

 

If you're talking about the culture in France Doc, they're rank in the top 20 for alcohol related deaths. Probably not the best example. The restrictions probably stem from a mix of Royal's experiences with both irresponsible parents and under-age drinkers along with Aquahounds points on our litigious society.

 

While what you say might make sense, you can thank the litigious American society for policies like this, especially when going after companies with deep pockets like RCI. Should anything happen, the venue for a case against the cruise line is Miami and while drinking on the high seas while under 21 is not illegal, hearing the case in a venue where businesses are fined heavily for serving to minors will not go well for the cruise line.

[LetsGetWet!]

If you're talking about the culture in France Doc, they're rank in the top 20 for alcohol related deaths. Probably not the best example. The restrictions probably stem from a mix of Royal's experiences with both irresponsible parents and under-age drinkers along with Aquahounds points on our litigious society.

Interesting... I tend to agree with DrD's thoughts on introducing teens to alcohol in moderation gradually at younger ages. Didn't know that statistic you mentioned, so went and took a look with google.

 

Denmark is #4, France #17 and Germany #20. Pretty much the only "first world" countries in the top 20. USA is #49. Not sure exactly what to make of that, but definitely interesting. I agree with you on the likely reason for the restrictions...

 

http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of-death/alcohol/by-country/

[TravelerThom]

...Denmark is #4, France #17 and Germany #20. Pretty much the only "first world" countries in the top 20. USA is #49. Not sure exactly what to make of that, but definitely interesting. I agree with you on the likely reason for the restrictions...

http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of-death/alcohol/by-country/

This is interesting, and is useful as an overview.

 

Having said that, most people have multiple causes of death, and what is listed on Death Certificates usually doesn't tell the whole story. If I have a long time family physician and drop dead from a heart attack that was pretty much due to my having been an alcoholic for years, my doc is NOT going to write down Alcoholic as cause of death. My take is that while the population in Denmark, France and Germany do drink considerably, the medical profession is also more honest in listing cause of death. Does anyone really think that sixty-five (65) times as many people die due to alcohol in St. Vincent than in Jamaica? That may be what the Death Certificates say, but I have been to both of these Caribbean nations and no way that particular statistic is valid.

[LetsGetWet!]

This is interesting, and is useful as an overview.

 

Having said that, most people have multiple causes of death, and what is listed on Death Certificates usually doesn't tell the whole story. If I have a long time family physician and drop dead from a heart attack that was pretty much due to my having been an alcoholic for years, my doc is NOT going to write down Alcoholic as cause of death. My take is that while the population in Denmark, France and Germany do drink considerably, the medical profession is also more honest in listing cause of death. Does anyone really think that sixty-five (65) times as many people die due to alcohol in St. Vincent than in Jamaica? That may be what the Death Certificates say, but I have been to both of these Caribbean nations and no way that particular statistic is valid.

I would tend to agree that the data from Jamaica and a few of the other third-world countries reporting "0.1" is likely suspect. But I think its a stretch to say that reporting is better/more honest in Denmark, France and Germany than it is in the US. Again, I'm not even sure exactly what conclusion to draw from those numbers, since I'm a proponent of teaching responsible drinking in moderation at home during teen years - but I'm guessing that the relative rankings of most first-world countries in the list are reasonably accurate. Just a guess though...

[DrD]

Interesting stats, but not helpful. It's quite possible that alcoholism would be even higher without the early exposure. Kids will at some point be exposed to alcohol, not exposing them when young will not necessarily prevent them from having problems later. Furthermore stats can be skewed all kinds of ways, for example France has lower rates of cardiovascular disease, and it's possible that many Americans who die of CV disease would have died of cirrhosis had they lived longer. Furthermore as has been mentioned docs can be reluctant to formally diagnose alcoholic cirrhosis due to its implications around liver transplant candidacy; perhaps not coincidentally we have a much higher rate of "NASH" (non-alcoholic steatohepatits ie fatty liver) than other countries. For another example in the 1800's almost no one died from tobacco despite its ubiquitous use, because they almost all died of infectious disease before they were old enough to develop tobacco-related disease.

 

Anyway we're supposed to be culturally sensitive, right? ;)

 

At least that's what I tell my boss when I need a long lunch.

[TravelerThom]

There is not a lot of room on a Death Certificate to list causes of death. Most deaths are from multiple causes; even if you suffer major blunt trauma in a car wreak you may make it to the hospital and due to all the trauma then have a heart attack. While the heart attack was the final straw that killed you, IMO you died of blunt trauma. The doctor has to put down something and it has to be concise, and what is put down may be culturally biased (and that could be the culture of the country or the culture of the hospital). If you die at an advanced age there is probably a whole shopping list of causes that could be listed. It is easy for statistics to be deceiving even though there was no intended deception.

 

Thom

[jbond]

Interesting stats, but not helpful. It's quite possible that alcoholism would be even higher without the early exposure. Kids will at some point be exposed to alcohol, not exposing them when young will not necessarily prevent them from having problems later. Furthermore stats can be skewed all kinds of ways, for example France has lower rates of cardiovascular disease, and it's possible that many Americans who die of CV disease would have died of cirrhosis had they lived longer. Furthermore as has been mentioned docs can be reluctant to formally diagnose alcoholic cirrhosis due to its implications around liver transplant candidacy; perhaps not coincidentally we have a much higher rate of "NASH" (non-alcoholic steatohepatits ie fatty liver) than other countries. For another example in the 1800's almost no one died from tobacco despite its ubiquitous use, because they almost all died of infectious disease before they were old enough to develop tobacco-related disease.

 

Anyway we're supposed to be culturally sensitive, right? ;)

 

At least that's what I tell my boss when I need a long lunch.

 

Like.:)